Its safe to say Feinstein, Obama and the rest of the gun control gang face an uphill battle when it comes to limiting any Second Amendment rights. According to a Fox News poll, most Americansboth Republicans and Democratswould defy any new laws that would take away their guns.

But on to Question 47, addressed to those with a gun in their home: "If the government passed a law to take your guns, would you give up your guns or defy the law and keep your guns?"

The response: 65 percent reported they would "defy the law." That incudes 70 percent of Republicans, 68 percent of conservatives, 52 percent of Democrats and 59 percent of liberals.

The good news is that it probably wont come to this. Analysis from Bloomberg shows that if a vote were held today, Feinsteins proposed gun control legislation, which would prohibit the sale or transfer of an estimated 158 assault weapons, would fail to pass the Democrat-controlled Senate.

At least six of the 55 senators in the Democratic caucus have expressed skepticism or outright opposition to a ban, the review found. That means Democrats wouldnt have a 51-vote majority to pass the measure, let alone the 60 needed to break a Republican filibuster to bring it to a floor vote. [ ]

>>>Two-Thirds of American Gun Owners Would Defy a Federal Gun Ban<<<

Which is actually the goal, in my opinion.

The totalitarian state we’re evolving into has learned from the crude examples of Stalin and Mao. A comprehensive ban on many kinds of firearms - but not all kinds - will create an immense population of lawbreakers, including not only those against the law but those confused by its complexity, but they’re not going to round everyone up. There’s no need. It’s a potential weapon that can be taken out and used on a case-by-case basis to promote friends and harass enemies. Stalin was wrong about creating terror. All that is really needed is a sense of confusion, unease and distrust. Sometimes people will be arrested, or fined, or merely bothered, just enough to be in the news or be held up in show trials. With the emotions of the population focused this way, those in power can consolidate what they have and prevent others from taking it away.

On the other hand, we’ll have all the porn we want, and probably enough weed to keep certain sections of the population docile. And it won’t matter if the weed is legal or not, either. That’s another tool that can be used to control people.

Ayn Rand predicted this in a stirring speech within “Atlas Shrugged.” Honest men can’t be controlled, so the state creates lawbreakers where no existed before.

Many of those potential lawbreakers are warriors who are prepared to take the fight directly to our domestic enemies.

It will not be effective until the movement gets a good leader. Today the totaliarian government can be defeated by the power of PR that is now accessible to everyone for free. In Hitler's and Stalin's time the state was in complete control of every word in the news. Today it's the opposite, FR being an easy example.

Without the leader and without the PR the refuseniks will be taken down one by one, often even without a shot fired. The JBT will wait until you leave the house and then arrest you in the parking lot. They know that a lawful gun owner is not going to shoot at a police officer in the street. It's very safe for them.

There were no "leaders" at the start of the American revolution. Leadership grew out of the growing rebellion. A decade before, Ben Franklin was warning the British that the wouldn't find weapons but very likely would spark a revolution.

I personally am not one of those who believes an armed revolution is on the horizon but there is clearly a growing resistance and where it goes is up to our government, many of whom are themselves beginning to resist along with us.

Q. Can anything less than a military force carry the Stamp Act into execution?

A. I do not see how a military force can be applied to that purpose.

Q. Why may it not?

A. Suppose a military force sent into America; they will find nobody in arms; what are they then to do? They cannot force a man to take stamps who chooses to do without them. They will not find a rebellion; they may indeed make one.

The only reason for registration would be to either reclassify the weapons as Class III (something that HAD been floated in an earlier version of this crazy legislation), forcing the owners to jump through all sorts of hoops, to passing laws that would require owners to purchase liability "insurance" that would be prohibitively expensive, or simply unavailable, requiring uninsured owners to "turn them all in."

Or to simply ban them, and go around collecting them. Of course, no matter what excuse they use would be to ban them in the end.

Mark

17
posted on 01/26/2013 5:27:34 PM PST
by MarkL
(Do I really look like a guy with a plan?)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.